DCIT, New Delhi v. Sh. Satnam Arora, New Delhi

ITA 1647/DEL/2013 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 164720114 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AAKPA2694L
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 1647/DEL/2013
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, New Delhi
Respondent Sh. Satnam Arora, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Department
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 09-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 08-06-2017
Next Hearing Date 08-06-2017
First Hearing Date 08-06-2017
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 21-03-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES G DELHI .. ! BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1647/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-22 NEW DELHI` / VS. SHRI SATNAM ARORA 201 VIPPS CENTRE 2 COMMUNITY COMPLEX MASJID MOTH G.K.-II NEW DELHI-110048 ( / REVENUE) ( &' /ASSESSEE) P.A. NO.-AAKPA2694L + / DATE OF HEARING : 09 /11 /2017 + / DATE OF ORDER: 09 / 11 /2017 &' / ASSESSEE BY SHRI SALIL KAPOOR SHRI SAMAT KAPOOR SHRI SUMIT LAL CHANDANI / REVENUE BY SHRI S.S. RANA CIT -DR ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 2 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE D 08/01/2013 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY NE W DELHI. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE PERTAINS TO DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.57 46 800/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN JEWELLERY. 2. DURING HEARING THE LD. CIT-DR SHRI S.S. RANA DEFENDED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFF ICER BY ADVANCING ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROU ND RAISED. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF INVESTMENT MADE IN THE JEWELLERY BEFO RE THE AO AND ONLY SHRI SATNAM ARORA FILED WEALTH TAX RETURN WHEREIN ALSO NO VALUATION REPORT WAS ATTACHED. IT WAS PLEA DED THAT IN THE CASES OF REMAINING FAMILY MEMBERS WEALTH TAX RE TURN WERE NOT FILED AND EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) NEW CLAIM WAS MADE WITH RESPECT TO DAUGHTER-IN-LAW. THE CRUX OF T HE ARGUMENT IS IN SUPPORT TO THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ON THE OTHER HAND SHRI SALIL KA POOR ALONG WITH SHRI SANAT KAPOOR AND SHRI SUMIT LAL CHANDANI LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORD ER BY ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 3 INVITING OUR ATTENTION TO PARA-4.2 OF THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER. IT WAS ALSO PLEADED THAT THE LD. AO MERELY GAVE THE CR EDIT OF 500 GMS. OF JEWELLERY IN EACH CASE AND THE REMAININ G JEWELLERY WAS DULY EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THE ASS ESSEE SURRENDERED RS.30 LAKHS WHICH COVERS THE ALLEGATIO N MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. A STRONG PLEA WAS RAISED T HAT ALL THE PURCHASES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DULY REFLECTED I N THE BALANCE SHEET AND THE CREDIT OF THE PURCHASES MADE AT THE LATER STAGE WHICH ARE DULY EXPLAINED WAS NEVER GI VEN TO THE ASSESSEE. OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO THE CHART AV AILABLE AT PAGE-4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND IT WAS PLEADED THA T SURRENDER WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE NECE SSARY DETAILS COULD NOT BE FILED DURING SEARCH. SO FAR AS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. CIT-DR THAT FRESH MATERIAL/EV IDENCE WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) IT WAS EXPLAINED T HAT NO NEW MATERIAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND FURTHER EVEN THE REVENUE HAS NOT RAISED ANY GROUND WITH RESPECT TO V IOLATION OF RULE-46A OF THE RULES. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 4 ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED REGULAR RETURN OF INCOM E ON 29/08/2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.44 60 398/ - AND THEREAFTER REVISED RETURN WAS FILED ON 17/03/2009 A T A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.74 60 398/-. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTI ON U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT IN KOHINOOR FOODS LT D. GROUP OF CASES INCLUDING ASSESSEE ON 15/12/2007. DURING SEARCH ORNAMENTS WEIGHING 7927.7 GMS. VALUED AT RS.1 87 86 790/- WAS FOUND OUT OF WHICH THE JEWELLE RY WEIGHING ABOUT 2214.4 GMS WAS SEIZED FROM THE PREMI SES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF REMAINING JEWELLERY WHILE RECORDING STATEMENT U /S 132(4) OF THE ACT DURING SEARCH ACTION. THE ASSESSEE SURR ENDERED RS.50 LAKH IN THE INDIVIDUAL HANDS AND OFFERED RS.3 0 LAKH IN HIS RETURN UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCE S. THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.25 LAKH WAS OFFERED IN THE CAS E OF SHRI JUGAL KISHORE ARORA BROTHER OF THE ASSESSEE. THE A SSESSEE VIDE REPLY DATED 15/12/2009 FILED THE REPLY WHICH HAS BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE LD. AO OBSE RVED THAT DURING SEARCH ON 05/12/2007 NO VALUATION REPO RT OF JEWELLERY WAS FOUND THEREFORE THE DIFFERENCE OF R S.2175 GMS. WAS INCLUDED IN THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT OF RS.30 LAK H IN THE ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 5 CASES OF SATNAM ARORA. AS PER THE REVENUE/AO NO EV IDENCE IN RESPECT OF SOURCE IN THE HANDS OF SATNAM ARORA MRS. RANI ARORA AND MRS. RITAKSHI ARORA (AS MENTIONED IN THE CHART AVAILABLE IN ASSESSMENT ORDER) WAS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE. THEREFORE THE JEWELLERY WEIGHING 4237.2 GMS WAS CO NSIDERED AS EXPLAINED AND THE REMAINING JEWELLERY 3690.8 GMS WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. THE AMOUNT OF RS.57 46 800/ - WAS ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT U/S 69A OF THE ACT. 2.2. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE FACTUAL MATRIX WAS CONSIDERED AND THE ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD . AO WAS DELETED AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 2.3. IF THE OBSERVATION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE FROM BOTH SIDES ARE KEPT IN JUXTAPOSITION AND ANALYZED WE NOTE THAT AS ON 31/03/2006 ( AS PER ASSESSMENT ORDER) TOTAL OF 4237 .20 GMS JEWELLERY WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE FAMILY AND TO THE TUNE OF 3690.80 GMS (7928.00 GMS MINUS 4237.20 GMS) REMAINE D TO BE UNEXPLAINED WHICH RESULTED INTO ADDITION OF RS.87 46 800/-. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED RS .30 LAKH ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 6 AS ADDITION INCOME THEREFORE THE LD. AO MADE ADDI TION OF RS.57 46 300/-. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED WITH EVIDENCE AND THE VALUATION REPORT OF THE ASSES SEE WAS DULY CONSIDERED ALONG WITH THE SUBMISSIONS AS IS EV IDENT FROM PARA-5 ONWARDS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. WE OBSER VE THAT BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE BILLS WITH RESPECT TO PURCHASE OF JEWELLERY OF SHRI SATNAM ARO RA RANI ARORA WERE PRODUCED AND THE SAME WERE DULY REFLECTE D IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FACTUAL MATRIX O F ACQUIREMENT OF JEWELLERY AND THE JEWELLERY WHICH W AS OWNED AFTER THE SURRENDER HAS BEEN EXPLAINED IN PARA-6 ON WARDS (TABLES) OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE TOTALITY OF FA CTS CLEARLY STATES THAT THE TOTAL FAMILY JEWELLERY OF 10882.63 GMS IS MORE THAN THE JEWELLERY FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH I.E. 7928 GMS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY SURRENDERED RS.30 LAKH THEREFORE WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE CONCLUSION O F THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE PART ADDITION SUSTAINED BY THE LD. AO RESULTANTLY THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS HAVING N O MERIT CONSEQUENTLY DISMISSED. 3. THE NEXT GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE PERTAINS T O DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.9 80 000/- MADE ON ACCO UNT OF ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 7 UNEXPLAINED CASH. THE CRUX OF THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY LD. CIT-DR IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED BY SUBMITT ING THAT THE SOURCE OF THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT WAS NOT EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE THE LD. AO RIGHTLY MADE THE AD DITION. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE E XPLAINED THAT RS.4 80 000/- WAS FOUND FROM THE BEDROOM OF TH E DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF THE ASSESSEE AND OUT OF THE AMOU NT OF RS.5 20 000/- THE AMOUNT OF RS.2 LAKHS WAS WITHDRA WN FROM THE BANK ON 26/10/2017 AND REMAINING 3 LAKH WA S WITHDRAWN ON 07/11/2007. WITH RESPECT TO HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES THE LD. COUNSEL EXPLAINED THAT THERE IS H UGE WITHDRAWAL OF RS.58 25 893/- DURING THE YEAR. 3.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HAVE P ERUSED THE SUBMISSION OF THE OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 05/02/2 012 16/10/2012 BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ALSO CONSIDER ED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. OUT OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS.9 80 000/- (RECORDED IN THE PANCHNAMA) FOUND DU RING SEARCH THE AMOUNT OF RS.4 80 000/- WAS FOUND FROM THE BEDROOM OF DAUGHTER-IN-LAW OF THE ASSESSEE MISS. RI TAKSHI AND THE AMOUNT OF RS.5 20 000 FROM THE BEDROOM OF T HE ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 8 ASSESSEE. UNDISPUTEDLY THE AMOUNT OF RS.2 LAKHS WA S WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK ON 26/10/2007 AND RS.3 LAKH ON 07/11/2007. ADMITTEDLY THE AMOUNT OF RS.58 25 893 /- WAS WITHDRAWN AS HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES. THE AMOUNT OF RS.5 20 000/- WAS FOUND FROM THE BEDROOM OF THE ASS ESSEE WHICH WAS EXPLAINED. THE TOTALITY OF FACTS CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS EXAMINED THE ISSUE IN A JUS TIFIABLE MANNER IN WHICH WE DONT FIND ANY INFIRMITY RESULT ANTLY THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS ALSO HAVING MERIT. THEREF ORE THE CONCLUSION DRAWN BY THE LD. FAA IS UPHELD. FINALLY THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN TH E PRESENCE OF THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 09/11/2017. SD/- SD/- (N. K. SAINI) (JOGINDER SINGH) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # ' /JUDICIAL MEMBER DELHI; DATED : 09/11/2017 F{X~{T? P.S/. .. $#&' (' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / / THE APPELLANT 2. 01/ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 3 ( ) / THE CIT NEW DELHI. 4. 3 / CIT(A)- DELHI ITA NO.1647/DEL./2013 SHRI SATNAM ARORA 9 5. 5 0 / DR ITAT DELHI 6. & / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER 15 0 //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT DELHI